Talk:Amplified Mobility Platform
I think this AMP system can be compared with Avatar, which is more advanced approach because it uses bio-chemical science technology while AMP is implemented by mechanical technology only. Funny how the glass breaks soooo easily. In the movie, the glass window broke kinda easily... I saw this commercial once on how this window glass was nearly "indestructable" not even a huge axe could break it and not even a machine gun could pierce through... and in the movie, it broke. O_O Another thing, the "cargo" in the picture is actually explosives, they were planning to bomb where the Navis live... no not the big tree, the new area where they live. ~Joji~ how well would a window last with a meter long arrow fired art it. also the windows seen to mantine environment them protection. also the pilots have to have good visibilty for power armor. Rex095 first of all the glass did not break it cracked. part from the thanator, which is understandable. and jake hit it with the bayonet of the AMP. both times cracked it and then jake jumps us and penetrates the glass with the bayonet. Na'vi are 4x strength of humans and he has a massive energy build in able to break the glass. nothing weird about this pasr at all. its not un-breakable just strong reinforced glass i would say.-Avatar- 23:15, January 7, 2010 (UTC) "how well would a window last with a meter long arrow fired art it. " well depending on the angle of the arrow hitting. if the arrow hit the glass at a perfectly straight angle it would break it. this is why in the last scene they are able to break it because they were above the ships and firing down on them unlike in the Hometree destruction scene where they were firing up at it without a good angle so they couldn't break it. -Avatar- 23:18, January 7, 2010 (UTC) in the film we are told that the RDA plan to destroy the tree of souls and its meant to be obvious that it is explosives. 19:41, March 10, 2010 (UTC) Headline text When you decide to copy such a big pice of a text why don't people add references it is very annoying.--[[User:Calles|'Calle's]] 22:17, January 10, 2010 (UTC) Mitsubishi Mitsubishi are the amp suit manufacturer. JayBO Talk IRC Guestbook 00:51, January 24, 2010 (UTC) Amazing weapon! wow thats something i never realised 19:43, March 10, 2010 (UTC) Matrix Revolutions suits The suits featured in the battle against the machines are similer to the AMP Suit except they have no glass cover or combat knife. I wounder if there should be a trivia about it. What do the rest of you think?I know EVERYTHING 11:23, March 10, 2010 (UTC) : Thought this would come along eventually. The APU (armored personnel unit) suits are different in the fact that they only carry one form of armament - the two 30mm cannons that are belt fed from the rear of the unit and they don't have as much maneuverability but I suppose a bit in the trivia section would be appropriate. ::Its really more like a solid progression of our technology than trivia, same with the dual roter vtol we see everywhere now. I see no point to adding it, if we do we might as well add this too JayBO Talk IRC Videos 14:37, March 10, 2010 (UTC) That's fine, i just though of the similarites since they are both suits each having/lacking something the other does not. But if not it doesn't matter.I know EVERYTHING 01:53, March 11, 2010 (UTC) What Na'vi name? I noticed that near the top it says: whereas the Na'vi name for it roughly translates as "shield that walks" or "not-demon walking", and yet it does not say what the Na'vi name is. ~~The Avatar Man~~ :It's mentioned nowhere. Only those two phrases can be found in the Survival Guide. Faern. 3D-HD-Pics 19:24, July 9, 2010 (UTC) :Oh. ~~The Avatar Man~~ Up to eleven This suits number is 11, I think this is a cool reference to that was slipped into the movie and was woundering if anyone else noticed it.User:Swg66-Cambria ne'er can yield! 03:40, November 23, 2010 (UTC) I mean Quaritchs suit, forgot to include that, also wondering if this fact should be included in the artical.User:Swg66-Cambria ne'er can yield! 03:44, November 23, 2010 (UTC) If it's an intentional reference, then it should be included. If not, then it isn't. Since this is nearly impossible to confirm (unless you have direct communication with James Cameron/any of the Avatar concept artists), it should be left out. HKT 04:13, November 23, 2010 (UTC) I highly doibt that is was unintentional, I am well aware of the rules of the wiki, but coincodent or not I think the term desribes Quaritch very well.User:Swg66-Cambria ne'er can yield! 04:20, November 23, 2010 (UTC) Revision 105117 It may seem that a lot of edits get reverted throughout the wikia, and I'm not talking about the ones with clear vandalism - edits where someone has consciously gone through the article and made additions, etc. I thought it may be prudent to list in detail why I have chosen to revert edits in this case, as to suggest cause behind my rollback decisions; decisions which (I hope you all agree) conform to the wiki policies on article manual of style (and thus making the article conform). *Line 14 - "as well" is in the sense of syntax, synonymous with "also". **"if the operator happens to be injured or killed in the field, the AMP suit has an automated "walk back" feature. This was developed to protect the AMP suit "from destruction", as it is a..." :::pedantic I know, but the walk back feature would also activate within Hell Gate I would think. I question the extent to which this actually would protect against destruction. I don't think its the primary concern; mainly just to return the occupant and device back to Hells Gate. Destruction does seem self evident, but I it's not really our place to infer. *Line 26: Addendum doesn't work grammatically. Is Quaritch in conversation with someone else, or is Jake in conversation with Quaritch (which would draw into conflagration "finds" earlier in the sentence (these are rhetorical questions). **improper use of cavalry and "at them" unnecessary. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. --IWantheUltimateChange (talk) 14:49, April 28, 2013 (UTC)